IcePath icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
← New Search ↗ Social Card

Anna Barlow Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1996-09-02 Country: USA
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

NCAA D3 / D2

Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw PPG  ·  ■ Solid blue = age-adjusted NCAAe-PPG  ·  ■ Green = actual college PPG
Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP G A Pts PPG NCAAe-PPG Age-Adj D3e-PPG Age-Adj
2010-11 South St. Paul High (W) USHS-MN-W 25 4 14 18 0.720 0.1156 0.1255 — —
2011-12 South St. Paul High (W) USHS-MN-W 25 7 30 37 1.480 0.2377 0.2476 — —
2012-13 South St. Paul High (W) USHS-MN-W 25 7 16 23 0.920 0.1478 0.1486 — —
2013-14 South St. Paul High (W) USHS-MN-W 25 9 15 24 0.960 0.1542 0.1495 — —
2014-15 South St. Paul High (W) USHS-MN-W 24 11 6 17 0.708 0.1138 0.1032 — —
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div Conference Year GP G A Pts PPG
2016-17 Minnesota D1 WCHA-W — 5 0 1 1 0.200
2015-16 Minnesota D1 WCHA-W — 21 2 1 3 0.143
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.11
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.14
2015-16 · Minnesota
+24.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#1888
Defenseman overall
#194
Defenseman born in 1996
#1435
in USHS-MN-W

D1 Comparables

Cheyenne Harris
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Union (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Turnquist
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Briana Jorde
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.68 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Amanda Kimmerle
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.60 PPG
→ RPI (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Megan Hinze
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.60 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Cheyenne Harris
Union ·
0.324 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Taylor Turnquist
Clarkson ·
0.171 Developing D
actual D2/3 PPG
Briana Jorde
Bemidji State ·
0.077 Developing D
actual D2/3 PPG

How to read this: NCAAe and D3e factors convert a player's junior PPG into expected NCAA scoring at the D1 or D3 level. Harder conferences → lower projected PPG for the same player. A strong junior player (e.g. USHL 0.90 PPG) will project much higher in NESCAC than Big Ten because the D3 scoring environment is lower-difficulty.

Strength factor: conferences above 1.0 are harder than average; below 1.0 are easier. The formula is: Base NCAAe PPG ÷ Conference Strength = Projected PPG.